In a ruling on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez of Los Angeles delivered a blow to plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit challenging National Football League (NFL) restrictions on televised games. The judge granted the NFL’s motion to block a trial subpoena aimed at compelling Hans Schroeder, the league’s Executive Vice President of Media Distribution, to testify live at the upcoming trial.
The lawsuit, set to commence on June 5, alleges collusion between the NFL and its member teams, along with television broadcast partners, to tightly control game distribution. Plaintiffs argue that this control has artificially inflated the price of the Sunday Ticket package, a subscription service allowing viewers to watch out-of-market NFL games. Both residential and commercial subscribers, including bars, hotels, and restaurants, seek damages amounting to billions of dollars for what they perceive as overcharges.
Read more: NFL’s Exclusive Streaming of Playoff Game Raises Antitrust Concerns
However, Gutierrez’s recent rulings have shaped the trajectory of the upcoming trial, determining which evidence will be admissible. The NFL’s successful bid to prevent Schroeder from testifying live, citing his residence in New York and prior deposition, marks a strategic victory for the league. Nonetheless, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Brian Rolapp, Schroeder’s supervisor who oversees Sunday Ticket, are expected to provide in-person testimony.
The NFL has vehemently denied the allegations, asserting that its distribution practices are fair and designed to uphold the quality of the product. Notably, the defendants in this case are exclusively the NFL and its member teams; neither DirecTV nor YouTube TV, the current carrier of Sunday Ticket, are implicated.
Despite the setback in compelling live testimony from Schroeder, the plaintiffs retain the option to present a videotaped deposition of the executive.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Judge Allows FTC Antitrust Case Against Amazon to Move Forward
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
SAP Leader Urges Caution on EU AI Rules, Warns of Competitive Disadvantage
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Colorado’s Grocery Workers Unite to Oppose $24.6 Billion Supermarket Merge
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Competition Bureau Warns Businesses of Tougher Enforcement
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Top Antitrust Lawyers Launch New Boutique Firm
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh